Having introduced the LLL reduction, we now provide a more general notions of a reduced basis for a lattice as well as provide bounds for the basis vectors. The key idea behind introducing these definitions is that once we know some basis vector is []-reduced, we can bound the sizes of the basis, which is important when algorithms require short vectors in a lattice. For fast algorithms, LLL-reduction is typically the most important notion as it can be computed quickly. Two main definitions appear often when discussing lattice reductions, which we will provide here.
Definitions
A basis{bi}i=1dis size-reduced if ∣μi,j∣≤21. Intuitively this captures the idea that a reduced basis being "almost orthogonal".
Let Lbe a lattice, 1≤i≤dimL=d, we define the ithsuccessive minimaλi(L) as
λi(L)=min(1≤j≤imax(∥vj∥):vj∈L are linearly independent)
Intuitively, λi(L)is the length of the "ith shortest lattice vector". This intuition is illustrated by the definition of λ1:
λ1(L)=min(∥v∥:v∈L)
However this is not precise as if vis the shortest lattice vector, then −vis also the shortest lattice vector.
Unfortunately, a basisbifor Lwhere λi(L)=∥bi∥for dimensions 5 and above. This tells us that we can't actually define "the most reduced basis" in contrast to the 2D case (see Lagrange's algorithm) and we would need some other definition to convey this intuition.
An alternate definition ofλi(L)that will be helpful is the radius of the smallest ball centered at the origin such that the ball contains at leastilinearly independent vectors inL.
Exercises
1) Show that both definitions of λi are equivalent
2) Consider the lattice L=2000102001002010002100001. Show that the successive minima are all2but no basisbican satisfy ∥bi∥=λi.
Minkowski reduced
Definition
The basis{bi}i=1d is Minkowski-reduced if bihas minimum length among all vectors in L linearly independent from{bj}j=1i−1. Equivalently, bihas minimum length among all vectors vsuch that {b1,…,bi−1,v}can be extended to form a basis ofL. Such a notion is strongest among all lattice reduction notions and is generally extremely hard to compute. Another equivalent definition is
∥bi∥≤j=i∑dcjbjgcd(cj)=1
Bounds
λi(L)2≤∥bi∥2≤max(1,(45)i−4)λi(L)2
The proof presented here is based off [Waerden 1956]. We proceed by induction. Letbibe a Minkowski-reduced basis for some latticeL. The lower bound is immediate and for i=1, the upper bound is immediate as well.
Let v1,v2…vibe linearly independent vectors such that∥vj∥=λj(L). Let Li−1be the sublattice generated by b1,b2,…bi−1. Evidently somekmust exist such thatvkis not in Li−1. Consider the new lattice L′=L∩span(b1,b2,…bi−1,vk). Letvk′be the shortest vector inL′−Li−1such thatb1,b2,…,bi−1,vk′is a basis for L′and we have
Ifn=1, then we are done sincevkcan be extended to a basis of L, so ∥bi∥≤∥vk∥=λk(L)≤λi(L). Otherwise, we have n2≥4. Let vk′=p+qwherepis the projection ofvk′inLi−1. Since by definition we have∥p∥2≤∥p±bi∥2, we must have
but since λi(L)2≤∥bi∥2by definition, the case of i=2,3cannot occur here (hence n=1in these cases).
Exercises
1) Show that both definitions of Minkowski-reduced lattice are equivalent
2) Consider the lattice L=2000102001002010002100001. We have showed in a previous exercise that the successive minima are all2but no basisbican satisfy ∥bi∥=λi, show that for any Minkowski reduced basis bi, the basis must satisfy ∥bi∥2=max(1,(45)i−4)λi(L)2
HKZ reduced
Definition
Let πias the projection to the orthogonal complement of {bj}j=1i−1.Then the basis is HKZ-reduced if it is size-reduced and ∣∣bi∗∣∣=λ1(πi(L)). This definition gives us a relatively simple way to compute a HKZ-reduced basis by iteratively finding the shortest vector in orthogonal projections.
Bounds
i+34≤(λi(L)∣∣bi∣∣)2≤4i+3
LLL reduced
Definition
Let δ∈(41,1). A basis{bi}i=1dis δ- LLL-reduced if it is size reduced and satisfy the Lovász condition, i.e.
δ∥bi∗∥2≤bi+1∗+μi+1,ibi∗2
This notion of reduction is most useful to use for fast algorithms as such a basis can be found in polynomial time (see LLL reduction).